Variety Says 'Sinners' Should Win Oscar For Best Director Because The Director Is Black

The Academy Awards is Sunday, and while a majority of the country doesn't care, thanks to years of effort by Hollywood to make them not care, they still carry weight within the industry. 

Awards shows, and especially the Oscars, are nominally supposed to reward the best, highest quality achievements in film making from the past year. For some reason, three and a half months after last year ended, but I digress. Still, in theory, it's supposed to be a meritocracy, where the best are rewarded. 

For decades at least, that was generally how it went. Films like "The Godfather," "My Fair Lady," "The Bridge on the River Kwai," "All About Eve," "Casablanca," "The Best Years of Our Lives," and "Rebecca" have proven to be timeless classics that have held up as some of the best storytelling Hollywood's ever produced.

Then you look at the last few years. "Anora" won for 2024. "Everything Everywhere All At Once" won in 2022. "CODA" and "Nomadland" for 2021 and 2020. Outside of "Oppenheimer" in 2023, it's a bleak list. And it's representative of Hollywood's decline. 2025 wasn't a great year for movies either, with just a handful of films that broke through with audiences and/or critics. "Marty Supreme," starring Timothee Chalemet, "One Battle After Another" starring Leonardo DiCaprio, for example. Then there's "Sinners."

Of all the classic films in Hollywood history, of all the monumental achievements like "Lord of the Rings," "Sinners" has received the most Oscar nominations in the nearly 100-year sample of the Academy Awards. And while opinions on the film vary, one thing should not be up for debate. Awards should go to the most deserving candidate. And that's precisely the opposite of what entertainment industry publications are arguing.

Learn More About The Ultimate College Hoops Experience

LONDON, ENGLAND - APRIL 14: (L-R) Jack O'Connell, Omar Benson Miller, Wunmi Mosaku, Michael B. Jordan, Hailee Steinfeld, Jayne Lawson, Miles Caton, Li Jun Li and Delroy Lindo attend attends the "Sinners" European Premiere at the Cineworld Leicester Square on April 14, 2025 in London, England. (Photo by Gareth Cattermole/Getty Images for Warner Bros. Pictures)

‘Sinners’ Should Win Because It Deserves To, Not Because Of Race

Variety this week published an article saying that Ryan Coogler, who directed "Sinners," should win Best Director at the Oscars, because he's just the seventh black director to be nominated for Best Director, and none of the previous nominees have won. 

"There’s a saying often repeated in the Black community: you have to work twice as hard — sometimes 10 times harder — just to receive the same recognition," the article says. "Didn’t Coogler do that and then some? He delivered a film that broke records, drew audiences in enormous numbers and redefined what an original, Black-centered story can achieve — and still, the messaging suggests he might not be worthy. If that isn’t a loud and clear signal, I don’t know what is."

This argument, absurd as it is, makes ridiculous point after ridiculous point. "Sinners" may be good enough, Coogler's job good enough, to deserve winning the award. But box office performance and redefining what an "original, Black-centered story can achieve" has nothing to do with quality. Some love "Sinners," including David Hookstead here at OutKick. But if you believe Coogler should win, that's the argument you should be making, not that it should win because audiences bought tickets, and it's a "Black-centered story."

RELATED: Movie Of The Year Will Stun Viewers With Brutally Violent Ending | REVIEW

As if that weren't enough, the writer again makes the claim that Coogler should win because "the moment" demands it.

"I’m predicting Ryan Coogler not because the math demands it, but because this moment does. I take the responsibility of believing that Black people (and all underrepresented communities) can achieve greatness to heart, even when the deck is stacked against them," he claims.

What deck, exactly, was stacked against Coogler? He got his graduate degree at USC Film School, the best in the country. While at USC, at just 24 years of age, he got a meeting with Forest Whitaker's production company, which then turned into receiving financial and production backing for "Fruitvale Station." Because of those connections, and financial backing, he got Michael B. Jordan and Octavia Spencer in his first movie out of film school. That film, his first feature-length project, started pre-production when he was just 26. That is an unbelievably rare accomplishment. 

He's obviously an extremely talented and successful filmmaker who deserves accolades for his work, but acting as though he had to overcome some type of racial bias to get into the entertainment business is absurd and inaccurate. Making him out to be a "victim," held back by a "stacked deck" when he became one of Hollywood's most sought-after directors before the age of 30 is ridiculous.

Again, none of this is to say that Coogler shouldn't win Best Director for "Sinners." Whether you think the film and his directing of it is worthy is a matter of opinion. But to make the case that he needs to win because of his race? That's nonsense, and it goes against what the Oscars are supposed to be. Not that anyone cares about it these days anyway.